Hundreds of thousands of low-income and disabled Americans are facing the prospect of significant cuts to their Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefits, as the Trump administration takes steps to reverse a key Biden-era policy. The proposed rollback, announced last week and detailed in statements by lawmakers and analysts, could impact some of the nation’s most vulnerable citizens—particularly at a time when inflation is squeezing household budgets and the cost of essentials like food and shelter continues to rise.
According to Axios, the Trump administration’s move centers on rescinding a rule that allowed SSI recipients who live in households receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits—commonly known as food stamps—to receive their full SSI payments. This Biden-era change, implemented in 2024, had a profound effect: around 300,000 people saw their monthly SSI checks increase, and another 100,000 became newly eligible for the benefit. For those recipients, the maximum monthly SSI payment is about $900, but only if they have less than $2,000 in their bank accounts.
SSI is a federal program designed to provide cash payments to people who are very poor and unable to work, typically due to a disability. Many recipients are older Americans who haven’t earned enough to qualify for meaningful Social Security retirement benefits. The program’s strict asset limits and low benefit amounts already make life challenging for beneficiaries, who often rely on every dollar to cover basic needs.
But the Trump administration’s proposed rule would no longer count SNAP as “public assistance” for the purposes of SSI eligibility. Under the previous system, if an SSI beneficiary lived with others who were also struggling and receiving certain forms of welfare—like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF)—their SSI benefits wouldn’t be reduced. However, as Axios points out, only about 2 in 10 poor Americans now receive cash welfare, while a far larger share depend on SNAP. The Biden-era rule recognized this reality by allowing SNAP to count as public assistance, ensuring that SSI recipients in such households weren’t penalized.
The potential consequences of reversing this policy are stark. The Center for Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) estimates that if the Trump administration’s plan goes into effect, 300,000 people would see their monthly SSI checks reduced, while another 100,000 would lose their benefits entirely. In Connecticut alone, this could affect around 4,300 residents, according to a statement released on September 8, 2025, by House Social Security Subcommittee Ranking Member John B. Larson.
Larson did not mince words in his criticism of the proposal. “It is not enough for his budget to kick 15 million Americans off their health care. Donald Trump is about to push hundreds of thousands of people off their disability benefits,” he said. “For Americans who are unable to work, SSI barely covers their basic needs. To rip that away with the stroke of a pen is flat out cruel. But it is what we have come to expect from this President, who remains laser focused on dismantling the people’s benefits so he can hand them over to his buddies on Wall Street.”
Larson’s statement also highlighted the broader context, noting that House Republicans planned to hold a hearing on September 9, 2025, to discuss additional ways to cut benefits by increasing administrative red tape. “When five million seniors retire into poverty, we should be working to enhance benefits, not looking for ways to cut them,” Larson argued, adding, “It is beyond shameful for Republicans to cheer on these cuts while they hand yet another tax break to the top one percent.”
The practical mechanics of the rule change are complex, but the impact is simple: less money for people who already have very little. The maximum SSI benefit, already just $900 a month, is not enough for many to cover rent, food, and other essentials—especially as inflation bites. The CBPP warns that the new rules “could discourage families from offering help to their loved ones,” since any in-kind support or shared resources might reduce SSI payments or disqualify recipients altogether. The upshot, critics say, is that more people could end up in institutional care, separated from their families and communities.
Administrative challenges loom as well. The Social Security Administration (SSA), which oversees SSI, is already grappling with reduced staffing and increased workloads. Critics argue that the proposed rule would create additional red tape, making it harder for eligible people to access benefits and for staff to process claims efficiently. However, in a statement to Axios, an SSA spokesperson defended the proposal: “The proposed rule would return us to the longstanding criteria and policies that were in place for decades before 2024. We do not expect this return to the status quo to create unnecessary red tape or cause an increase in workload for SSA staff. As is standard with rulemaking processes, the proposed rule will be made publicly available, and the public will be given a chance to comment before the rule is finalized.”
The debate over the SSI rule change is just one front in a broader battle over the social safety net. Axios reports that the White House’s recent legislative agenda has included cuts to SNAP and Medicaid as well, adding to the pressure on low-income Americans. Progressive groups, like the CBPP, argue that these moves collectively threaten to unravel vital supports for millions of people who are struggling to make ends meet.
Supporters of the Trump administration’s approach contend that returning to pre-2024 policies simply restores the original intent and fiscal discipline of the SSI program. They argue that expanding eligibility through SNAP risks ballooning costs and may create incentives for people to rely on government aid rather than seek work or other forms of self-sufficiency. They also point out that the rule change is subject to public comment, offering an opportunity for all sides to weigh in before any final decision is made.
Opponents, however, see the move as a step backward—one that ignores the realities facing low-income Americans today. With traditional cash welfare programs serving only a small fraction of the poor, many families depend on SNAP as their primary form of assistance. Stripping away the ability to count SNAP as public assistance for SSI purposes, they argue, is out of touch with the lived experience of millions and risks pushing the most vulnerable even further into poverty.
As the public comment period approaches, the stakes couldn’t be higher for those who depend on SSI to survive. The coming weeks will be critical, as advocacy groups, lawmakers, and ordinary citizens make their voices heard on an issue that touches the heart of the nation’s commitment to its neediest members.
The fate of hundreds of thousands of disabled and low-income Americans now hangs in the balance, as policymakers weigh the costs and consequences of altering the rules that govern one of the country’s most essential safety net programs.
